Workers’ compensation — Compensable accidents — Exposure to toxic substance — Fungus — Causation — Burden of proof — Order finding that employee’s death resulted from workplace exposure to toxic fungus is reversed — Judge of compensation claims erroneously determined that the heightened standard for toxic exposure under section 440.02(1) did not require proof, by clear and convincing evidence, of the quantitative level of exposure due to the “ubiquitous” nature of the fungus at issue — Furthermore, competent substantial evidence does not support JCC’s determination that claimants satisfied, by clear and convincing evidence, their burden for occupational causation under section 440.09(1) — Expert testimony that fungus is ubiquitous does not alone satisfy the burden of proving workplace presence — JCC erred by implying that direct evidence of the presence of toxic fungus at the workplace was unnecessary because there was no evidence of non-workplace exposure — Proof of causation is wholly on the employee and the employer/carrier is under no obligation to disprove claim by introducing evidence of non-workplace exposure
44 Fla. L. Weekly D2877a
The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.
opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index